Everyone has character armor through which the individual relates to the world. It is important to know a person’s character structure particularly if he happens to be a political leader. Identification of the politician’s individual and socio-political character tells us how well he is fit to function at his job.

What we know about President Trump’s character as a father, successful businessman, presidential candidate and the first days of his presidency, tells us that he is a high energy, phallic narcissistic character with an oral unsatisfied block. From the perspective of socio-politics, he is a conservative belonging on the political right. As such, he is authoritarian and, unlike his predecessor, openly in charge of his aggression. A product of the old authoritarian social order, Trump has a sense of the absolute distinction between right and wrong. Additionally, we know that he loves his country indicating that he has a degree of contact with his biological core and that, therefore, his “heart is in the right place” regarding his job qualifications as president.

These basic traits are sufficient to explain how he will function as president. Largely because of his high energy level and his experiences in business, he attempts to overcome the armored trappings of partisan politics by forcefully overriding them. Unfortunately, because of his impatience and his oral unsatisfied block – he brags, is over talkative and exaggerates – he gives people the false impression that he is unstable and opens himself to ridicule.

However, what really drives his leftist opponents crazy is that he is overtly aggressive to the point of being contentious and is shamelessly authoritarian. For example, he deals with the terrorist problem by declaring a ban on all Muslims from entering the United States; he deals with the immigration problem by announcing that he will build a wall between America and Mexico; he is outspokenly pro-American, etc.

A central feature of leftist ideology is their hatred of open aggression and their fear of genuine authority. In leftists, these natural human functions are repressed by a new layer of social armor, the relative morality of political correctness. The undischarged hatred contained in the leftist’s armor is redirected at anyone who claims to be a real authority. Unknown to Trump, this is the emotional plague that is out to destroy him and the authority of the executive office that he stands for. Even without knowledge of the plague, however, Trump seems to have a sense of the plague. This is recognizable in his forceful opposition to leftist attacks from the media.

The difference between a communist and a socialist is that communists want a violent overthrow of governments while socialists want a gradual overthrow. In our antiauthoritarian society governments are already in a state of advanced disintegration and so the term, communist is no longer applicable. Today, a socialist is the correct term to be used to describe these leftist radicals.

Barack Obama entered the political arena in the first decade of the 21th century when, with the help of the media, he successfully passed himself off as a liberal. This was a time when the threat of communism was being erased from the minds of the American public and rapidly becoming a word from the past. From a sociopolitical diagnostic standpoint, he was correctly identified at that time as a pseudo-liberal/communist. Today, with the antiauthoritarian transformation of society in full swing and the continuing breakdown of nations worldwide, socialist would be the apt term to describe people like him and others such as Hillary Clinton.

The gradual disintegration of the authoritarian social order and the continuing shift to the far left in the political mainstream are the reasons that a socialist named Bernie Sanders can come out of the closet and be championed by a far-left minded public as a legitimate political candidate.

But what is changing is not the character structure of the old time, freedom peddling politicians – the product – but the increasing demand – the market – of the helpless masses, young and old, who believe that they will be taken care of by this new/old order.

The following excerpt is from my forthcoming book, “Clueless”:
The emotional plague individual on the left operates subversively using his intellect to instill confusion either by political action or by inaction. The emotional plague individual on the right operates overtly using his emotions to instill terror through political reaction. For example, the Islamic State (ISIS) movement which operates from the far right originated from Muslim militants in response to the transformation of Western Society from authoritarian to anti-authoritarian which was accompanied by a shift of the political mainstream to the far left.

These extremists reacted emotionally and murderously to what they saw as a threat to their way of life. A manifestation of the emotional plague from the political right, their barbaric actions suddenly caught the attention of a clueless public in the western world by generating terror.

Meanwhile, the free world led by our feckless, left wing president choses to focus not on the terrorist threat and the need to join and support the anti-ISIS forces against the Islamic fanatics but on ousting the Syrian president Bashar al-Assad. He insists on this condition before he is willing to consider a military alliance. Knowing that he does not stand a chance to depose Assad, Obama’s political “action” is a disguised form of inaction. It is a destructive example of the emotional plague from the left because it generates confusion about what must be done. It effectively undermines the anti-ISIS coalition’s efforts to crush the terrorist organization militarily.

In the August 2-3 2014 issue of the Wall Street Journal “Out of Many, Two?,” Peggy Noonan writes: “The president shouldn’t be using a fateful and divisive word like “impeachment” to raise money and rouse his base. He shouldn’t be at campaign-type rallies where he speaks only to his base, he should be speaking to the country. He shouldn’t be out there dropping his g’s. slouching around a podium. complaining about his ill treatment, describing his opposition with disdain: Stop just hat’in all the time.”

But what if this is exactly how Obama feels and what he wants to do? The thought is too horrible and unbelievable for most people even to imagine. The question goes directly to Obama’s socio-political character structure, without an understanding of which, nothing can make sense. Noonan does not see the significance of the contempt toward America in Obama’s behavior. She does not see that she is hated by Obama and the entire anti-authoritarian mainstream exactly because she is associated with the past authoritarian social order. Reasoning with them is not possible because it does not stop the hate. It intensifies the divisiveness and is a political dead end.

A person’s political character structure is a primary determinant of social events. Therefore, it is necessary to have an understanding of political characterology which is the study of social and political behavior from the perspective of the individual’s socio-political character structure.

Even as America is sliding further to the left and turning into a socialist state and the Soviet Union no longer exists, the emotional plague in Russian politics continues to fester, reorganize and gather momentum. The emotional plague in Russia is now operating from the political far right under the leadership of Vladimir Putin. An ex-KGB officer and a rigid authoritarian, from a characterological standpoint Putin is an example of a reactionary politician belonging on the political right.

The reactionary character resists change. Sexually, he is very moralistic and restricted which is the basis for his sadism and mysticism. His mystical beliefs are rigidly held and are not subject to reason or proof.

As a politician, Putin has the mystical belief that Russian Society should be resurrected to it’s pre-Soviet “glory.” He has a great deal of brutality in his structure that is frequently overtly expressed or thinly disguised, and always rationalized and justified as necessary. Coupled with his brutality is his reputation for graciousness and hospitality – a reaction formation. Unlike the communist on the extreme left, Putin is governed not by his intellect alone but by his emotions that are rigidly contained in his muscular armor. This is particularly noticeable in the posterior muscles of his neck – He is “stiff-necked.” He does not set himself against religion but emotionally and politically aligns himself with the great Russian Orthodox Church which he attends regularly.

Putin is a militant nationalist, righteous in his political beliefs and intensely resentful of outside political interference in Russian ways of life. He is adept at providing rationalizations for justifying his aggressively expansionist impulses toward other countries and assumes that these sentiments are shared by the Russian people. His reasons for the annexation of Crimea, for example, were justified by his appeal to Russian nationalistic feelings and by trumped up grievances against that country.

However, Putin’s decision to annex Crimea was not based on mystical feelings alone. As an aggressive plague character on the right, he is excited by the fear of aggression and the fecklessness that he perceives in his opponents led by the President of The United States and he knows that he will get away with the seizure without firing a shot.

Whenever an acute social problem surfaces requiring immediate attention people always focus on the symptoms, never on the underlying disease. Putin’s grabbing Crimea is a symptom. The underlying emotional sickness of human beings that made this act of aggression possible is the disease that is always overlooked.

The following, in brief, is the symptom: As a result of it’s anti-authoritarian transformation, Western countries including Russia are socially disintegrating. Faced with this problem, a strong leader like Putin moves to the political right to take control of the social chaos in his country. He also quickly sizes up Barack Obama the leader of the Western World as a weak and politically ineffectual individual. To further consolidate his power, he decides to take an aggressive international action and seizes Crimea.

Part of the underlying disease is the social disintegration of Russian Society that needs to be controlled. Another part is that the same process of social disintegration to a far greater extent is happening in America. However, America’s social sickness is aggravated by having elected a President who has proven himself to be unable to take an aggressive stand to protect America’s interests in any area, either domestically and internationally.

The deepest level of humanity’s disease is that the American public does not see that they have elected a man who is to a large extent responsible for bringing about this international crisis and the destructive consequences that will follow. The American public’s cluelessness is the central problem.

When President Obama learned that the Syrians were using poison gas on their people he had two options: either to respond in some way militarily or to do nothing and say it was not America’s business to interfere. Instead, he expressed outrage at what the Syrians did and handed the problem of responding over to the Congress. In a way that is typical of him, he said one thing and did another.

In effect, Obama is saying now that “the American people” should lead America in this matter of what is to be done since he is not up to doing his job as leader of his country. Putting the problem in the hands of Congress turns it into a political issue between those who are for responding and those who are against doing anything. This is an example of how socio-politics enters into politics and covers up the original problem which as President of the United States is the responsibility of Barack Obama.

It is also typical of Obama to conceal himself behind the social confusion and divisiveness that he , himself, generates by politicizing the problem.

In order to successfully oppose the emotional plague’s social destructiveness, one must first have a clear understanding of its mode of operation. The cult of Saul Alinsky is a perfect example of the manifestation of the organized emotional plague from the extreme left (communist) end of the socio-political spectrum. Populated by many noted Alinsky disciples such as Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, its function is to fundamentally transform the United States of America into a socialist state.

Its first step is to penetrate the mainstream of American life by establishing common ground with financially influential individuals and institutions and pretending to have an ideological affinity with them. By securing a financial base, this step indicates that the plague’s infection has succeeded in taking hold of American society and is in a position to infiltrate and destroy its victim from within.

The second step is to camouflage its facade so as to appear to have the best of all intentions, a benign organization with a benevolent purpose. No longer are they communist political activists looking to “expropriate the expropriators.” Now, they are “community organizers” who champion “social justice for the poor and powerless masses.” Social justice means equalizing wealth by taking from those who have more and giving it to “the disadvantaged.” Nothing is mentioned about the the work disturbance of poor people that prevents them from taking advantage of the enormous opportunities to work in America. The most basic principle of Alinsky’s advice to radicals is to lie to their opponents and disarm them by pretending to be moderates and genuine liberals.

Now, plague individuals are in a position to carry out the third and final step of their destructive operation. This step was perfected by Alinsky when he was associated as a “mascot” with the Chicago mob where he learned their methods of extortion and intimidation in their day-to-day criminal operations. These methods, which clearly originated from the secondary destructive layer of criminals, were cleverly applied by Alinsky to his operations as a community organizer all within the existing legal system. (The Occupy Wall Street movement is a current example of how these methods are being played out.)

President Obama was an adept practitioner with a long history of familiarity with Alinsky’s methods. For several years Obama taught workshops on the Alinsky method. In 1986, he was hired by the Alinsky team to organize residents on Chicago’s South Side. His mode of operation as president closely resembles Alinsky’s and this is why liberals have to minimize Obama’s affinity for Alinsky in the upcoming presidential election.

One of the destructive consequences of the anti-authoritarian transformation of American society was the rapid influx of radical leftists into every area of social influence including politics, education, jurisprudence and the media. This has resulted in a dramatic shift of the political mainstream to the left of center (the socio-political red-shift.) This transformation is why today, anyone who is on the political left, even leftist radicals such as President Obama can appear to be just a political moderate in the eyes of many Americans.

Soon after the transformation occurred, this shift leftward in the political mainstream spontaneously resulted in the formation of the Conservative Party as a reaction to it and in the polarization in American society between the two political groups belonging on the left and right. The ideologies of the left and right are opposing forces that function like a true symptom in the social realm, the political left’s longing for unbridled freedom on the one hand and the right’s opposition to it on the other. The opposing forces of the left and right are the constituents of the social armor of armored humans that are becoming increasingly rigidified as the left relentlessly presses for it’s socialistic, ( “One World”) agenda on an unsuspecting American public.